Floor coverings have been in use since before recorded human history. The first such materials were undoubtedly animal skins or plant materials like leaves or stems. Later, floor coverings were manufactured, such as by weaving or knotting a variety of naturally occurring fibers, including sisal and wool. Beginning in the twentieth century, such fiber-faced floor coverings began to be manufactured from man-made fibers as well.
While the first floor coverings were limited in size to the size of an animal skin, later floor coverings expanded to cover entire room floors. Such “wall-to-wall” installations of “broadloom” floor covering came into wide-spread use in the twentieth century. Paradigm installations of such materials utilize one or a small number of pieces of broadloom carpeting to cover entire room floors. This type of wall-to-wall floor covering is generally attached to the floor in some manner.
Later, modular floor coverings utilized smaller, uniform size modules or tiles in both solid surface floor coverings such as vinyl tiles and in textile-faced floor coverings, usually called carpet tiles. As explained in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/638,878 for “Re-Configurable Modular Floor Covering,” filed Aug. 11, 2003, tiles may be installed, as area rugs that do not cover the entire flooring surface. However, the vast majority of tiles are used in wall-to-wall installations. Tiles have traditionally been installed in aligned rows and columns, with the edges of each tile aligned with the edges of adjacent tiles (“conventional carpet tile installation method”). Conventional carpet tile has historically been a product that sought to mimic the appearance of broadloom carpet and to hide or at least de-emphasize the fact that the product was modular. Achieving this result has required, at minimum, that carpet tiles or modules be placed in a flooring installation with the same orientation that the modules had at the time they were produced (i.e., monolithically). However, textile face modular flooring designers have recently begun to design flooring and flooring installations that do not seek to mask, but rather celebrate, the modularity of the flooring. For instance, while still installed in aligned rows and columns, modules are installed “quarter-turned” with each tile position rotated 90° relative to each adjacent tile.
Modules are not always installed in aligned rows and columns, however. For example, tiles are also installed in aligned columns that do not form aligned rows of modules so that a column of tiles appears shifted up or down relative to adjacent tile columns (“ashlar installation method”). In other installations, tiles are installed in aligned rows that do not form aligned, but rather staggered, columns (“brick-laid installation method”).
While the floor covering modules are generally of relatively substantial size and weight, which facilitates maintenance of the modules in the positions they are placed when the floor covering is assembled, it is desirable to provide a means for further resisting module movement. This has traditionally been accomplished by attaching the modules to the underlying flooring surface in a variety of ways.
Modules are often glued to the floor by first applying a layer of adhesive to the underlying flooring surface and then positioning the tiles on top of the adhesive. With this method, adhesive typically contacts the entire surface area of the underside of the flooring modules, which increases material costs and often leads to difficultly in re-positioning the tiles if they are positioned incorrectly. This is a particular problem during installation of patterned modules that must be matched at the seams. Moreover, when the tiles are eventually removed, glue remains on the flooring surface and that glue sometimes retains portions of the removed tiles. The glue (and any flooring materials held by the glue) must be removed from the floor to create a smooth surface before installing new tiles. This adds both cost and time to the installation process.
Modules may also be installed by pre-applying adhesive to the entire underside (or any part) of the module. For example, adhesive may be applied in a relatively narrow strip across each module underside and covered, prior to module installation, by a plastic film or paper strip that is peeled off just before module placement. Again, however, this method involves attaching the modules directly to the floor and can result in the consequent drawbacks discussed above.
Modules have also be installed using double-sided adhesive tape, whereby one side of the tape is positioned on the back of the module and the other side of the tape is positioned on the floor to thereby secure the module to the floor. Double-sided tape has also been positioned between and along the entirety of adjacent carpet and carpet tile edges. However, as with adhesive, double sided tape can be unforgiving with respect to tile re-positioning and can also leave a residue on the floor upon removal of the tiles. Moreover, the tape has a low tensile strength and is relatively inelastic and consequently is apt to stretch and not regain its shape. This can result in the gaps formed between adjacent tiles.
In addition to direct attachment to the floor, modules have also been indirectly attached to the underlying flooring surface, such as with mechanical fasteners or adhesive covered pads. For example, hook and loop fasteners have been used whereby a sheet of either the hook or the loop is secured to the floor and the other of the hook or the loop is provided on the back of the modules. The hook or loop on the modules then engages the hook or loop on the floor to secure the modules to the floor. Pads covered with adhesive have also been used. For example, a foam pad pre-coated on both sides with a releasable adhesive has been used. During installation, release paper is removed from both sides of the pad to expose the adhesive, and the pad is attached to the floor. Carpet tiles are then positioned on top of the pad and held in place by the adhesive. While these systems and methods may improve the installers' ability to re-position the tiles, they significantly increase the material cost of the installation. Moreover, with these installation methods, the tiles are more likely to move relative to each other and thereby create gaps in the installation.
Other installation methods exist whereby the tiles are neither directly nor indirectly attached to the floor. For example, one-sided adhesive tape, such as duct tape, has been used to secure adjacent tiles together. The tiles are positioned face down and the tape is secured along the entirety of the adjacent edges of the tiles. The tiles must then be carefully turned over to expose their wear surfaces without breaking the connection between adjacent tiles. This method requires a significant amount of time to position the tape on the tiles as well as a significant material investment to tape adjacent tile edges together along the entirety of the seams. Moreover, such adhesive tape is relatively flimsy, making it challenging to position the tape as desired on the underside of tiles, and, as with double-sided adhesive tape, suffers from low tensile strength and inelasticity, rendering it likely to permanently stretch when subjected to stress and thereby create permanent gaps between adjacent tiles.
While methods for installing floorcoverings exist, a need exists for a system and method that reduces both the time and material costs needed to install modules into a stable floorcovering.